GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol vs GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini

GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol is more reliable, by 25.6 points. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol passed 62 of 82 scenarios on all three runs, and GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini passed 41. A scenario only counts when every run of it passed.

For a voice agent, GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol, since it gets more scenarios right on every run. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol is ahead on reliability, success rate, agent responses, data accuracy and response time, and GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini on calls where the agent went quiet, interruption and cost.

GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol, by 24.5 points. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol saved everything exactly right on 89.0% of the calls that save data, and GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini on 64.5%. On Booking calls, 100.0% against 88.8%. On Medicare calls, 60.6% against 0.0%. A call counts only when nothing is missing, wrong, extra or saved twice.

Yes. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol starts replying 0.06s sooner at the median. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol takes 2.02s at the median and 2.42s at p90; GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini takes 2.08s and 2.75s. Both are measured on the call audio, from the caller finishing to the agent starting to reply.

GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini, by 0.10 on a 0 to 5 scale. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol scores 4.89 and GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini 4.99 for how well the agent handled being talked over.

GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini, by 9.7 points. The agent went quiet for 10 seconds or more on 12.2% of GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol calls and 2.5% of GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini calls.

GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini is $0.0351 cheaper a minute. GPT-Live 1 + GPT-6 Sol costs $0.0553 a minute of call and GPT Realtime 2.1 Mini $0.0202, at each vendor's published rates.

Cekura ran both as the whole agent in the same open-source Pipecat pipeline, with the same prompt, tools and connection. A simulated caller worked through all 82 scenarios on live calls, three times each, 3,690 calls across the benchmark. A call passes only when the agent said the right things and saved the right data.